you might find this an interesting read. if you don't have time to check it out, here are the image examples. The following is an excerpt from the article.

"ISO 6400 Pen E-P1 image, original camera JPEG

This image (above) was shot using ISO 6400, hand held. The camera has brightened the scene from that I recall seeing with my own eyes. To demonstrate how dark it was, the camera only got as high as 1/30th second shutter speed even with ISO 6400 sensitivity. The 14-42 lens was used again, this time at 22mm, or mid way through the zoom range, and the aperture was f/5.6. The camera's noise filter was switched off.

ISO 6400 Pen E-P1 image processed from RAW.

And this is my effort at processing the same image, but from the RAW file using Olympus Studio 2.3. The noise grain has been suiccessfully suppressed and although the image does have a softness about it if you look closely, as you can see here it works surprisingly well at Web resolution, and will be fine for small to mediun sized prints."

It's a bit ridiculous that the shrunkened, pseudo-DSLR gets you better IQ than true DSLRs from the same company.

Lol, im so pissed right now that the E3 can't even do ISO6400. Hell ISO3200 is useless.

Oh well, such is the fate of all technology. Months after purchase, its already obsolete.

Well, if this is really because of Truepic V, then any DSLR that has it should have in theory similar if not better performance. Considering the E3 and E-P1 are separated by over 18 months, the difference is not that surprising.

But that excuse doesn't fly so well with the E-620, released only a few months ago. On the positive side, all the current, IS DSLRs from Olympus have swivel LCD's and better general performance.

It's a bit ridiculous that the shrunkened, pseudo-DSLR gets you better IQ than true DSLRs from the same company.

Lol, im so pissed right now that the E3 can't even do ISO6400. Hell ISO3200 is useless.

Oh well, such is the fate of all technology. Months after purchase, its already obsolete.

Well, if this is really because of Truepic V, then any DSLR that has it should have in theory similar if not better performance. Considering the E3 and E-P1 are separated by over 18 months, the difference is not that surprising.

But that excuse doesn't fly so well with the E-620, released only a few months ago. On the positive side, all the current, IS DSLRs from Olympus have swivel LCD's and better general performance.

and with that said, looks like i'll be purchasing the e-3 successor and selling the e-3. i do shooting at a lot of performances and if flash is not permitted i would rather get the performance of the new sensor. i wish they would offer to update the e-3 with the new sensor for a fee as opposed to put out another e-3 body with a different sensor.

Just because it can shoot Iso 6400, doesn't mean it's better than 'other brands' Dslr's Other brands shoot to Iso 25600, does that mean I want to use Iso 25600 all the time? Nope. But yeah, it's nice to have higher Iso's.

Just because it can shoot Iso 6400, doesn't mean it's better than 'other brands' Dslr's Other brands shoot to Iso 25600, does that mean I want to use Iso 25600 all the time? Nope. But yeah, it's nice to have higher Iso's.

Is TruepicV a function of hardware or software or combination of both? If it was software only, shouldn't (theoretically) Oly be able to make the E-620's high ISO performance better? And yes, I'm still complaining about the noise in my E-620!